advertisement
advertisement
By The Conservatives | 2024-12-15
The country has been jarred by two major events in recent history; the national stay away of 1997 and the 2021 destructive riots.
The events represented agitations by some sectors of the civic/political community and individuals for reforms. Both events had a nation-wide impact in terms of their disruption of daily life.
Happening 24 years apart, the events were vastly different in their approach. The 1997 national stay away under the auspices of the then Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions (SFTU) followed a more gradual approach in achieving their desired goals.
In sharp contrast, the spontaneous 2021 riots have been characterised by progressives as an attempted revolution against the Tinkhundla system.
Though happening 24 years apart and obviously driven or claimed by a different generation of leaders, provides us with enough evidence to contrast the desirability and success of the two approaches, via gradualism a tactic followed by the SFTU and a revolution as a tactic followed by the contemporary progressives.
This is a critical exercise in the context of the largely populists-driven political discourse, which threatens to drown the voice of reason and thus undermine the country`s valiant march towards our lofty developmental goals.
First, we must state that it is a gross misnomer to refer to revolution inclined progressives as pro-democracy activists. It’s a misnomer that unfairly labels gradualists and moderates as an anti-democracy bulwark, and nothing could be further from the truth.
In fact, a careful look at the most visible organisations calling for a revolution reveals organisations that have weak institutional cultures and a weak to non-existent internal democracy and accountability.
Our argument is that gradualism has worked very well for this country, and it’s a process that was first facilitated by the co-option of the former opposition politicians into government after the dissolution of the Westminster Constitution.
Astute politicians like the late Arthur Khoza and Sishayi Nxumalo, who both at different points occupied the position of deputy prime minister it would be totally insulting to the esteem of these two gentlemen to suggest that they made no contribution to the policies of the country.
Their co-option represents our very first effort at gradualism drawing from a diverse ideological spectrum. Politicians drawn from defunct opposition parties went on to serve really long terms under the current system guaranteeing their sustained contribution in shaping our policies and institutions.
This a really good place to start the contrast between gradualism and revolution. We will proceed to provide more clarity on the undesirability of a revolution as well as provide evidence of the wisdom of the gradualism tactic.
The National
Stay-Away of 1997
The popular 27 demands, which encapsulated the breath of issues behind the 1997 national stay away, were extensively communicated to ensure nation-wide sympathies for the programme.
The demands included, among other things, old age grants, free education, respect for labour rights, etc.
The national stay away and the articulate leadership of the organisation, which included its secretary Jan Sithole, his assistant Jabulani Nxumalo, and Executive Members Joaquim Dlamini and Themba Msibi, provided adequate pressure for government to respond to some of these demands.
The few demands we mentioned here have become government policies, and that is a monumental impact of the tactic of gradualism.
These leaders remain the only group of which attained wide cross-sectional support and this was largely due to their wisdom to assert their independence as a worker’s federation rejecting the bait of being drawn into the ambit of anti-establishment politics.
Jan Sithole went on to be the member of Parliament for one of the constituencies in Manzini, having direct access at the levers of policy formulation and implementation. Former Prime Minister Obed Dlamini, a former trade unionist himself, and president of the Ngwane National Liberatory Congress (NNLC), occupied the highest office in the land, placing him at the driving seat of our national policy making machinery.
Again, this astute politician who never for a single moment abandoned his political convictions, certainly impacted our policy landscape as a country, a gradualism tactic that delivered and added momentum to more positive transformation.
We will be remiss if we fail to mention yet another former deputy prime minister, who also served as foreign affairs minister at some point, the late Albert Heshane Shabangu, who led the teacher’s union SNAT, during the most tumultuous times in our history.
All of these eminent leaders, some who were unashamedly for multiparty politics, served the country and understood that their doing so was enriching the country more than their boycotting could ever do.
Across the world
Scholars like Celestino et al (2013) have argued the case for gradualism as opposed to a revolution, mentioning countries such as Kenya, South Korea, and Brazil as shining examples of the tactic of gradualism.
The strategic nonviolent action embraced by reformers in these countries, taken at a time when the agitators did not have the power to unseat the regime (revolution), and the regime itself was not strong enough to repel or dismantle such movements. O`Donnell et al (1986) mentions the elite choice of approach, which entails the engagement of elites from all sides to negotiate an acceptable outcome.
The approach requires that parties neutralise or convince the hardliners within their ranks. This is the approach that appears to have been used in the South African transition.
This approach, which is gradualism, has been used in most transitions across the globe. The political reality of our time, as attested by the growing incidence of coalitions in national and municipal governments, is that none of the political actors, progressive, moderates, conservatives, and traditionalists can really claim overwhelming public support.
The Tinkhundla electoral process does not disadvantage candidates according to their ideologies; instead members are elected on individual merit thus facilitating open access to the levers of power to reform and shape policies and institutions.
It is difficult to understand the thinking of some in the progressive camp who choose to walk away from such an accessible process. Our no-party State system may not be a perfect democracy, but to ignore its accessibility and claim that it is undemocratic is blatantly dishonest.
Revolution
Scholars Ackerman et al (2005) did an extensive study covering 67 countries, in a study conducted from the 70s to the 90s, arrived at the conclusion that strong and cohesive non-violent civic coalitions are more likely to be more democratic in the post-transition era.
The same cannot be said of a revolution, in fact, Celestino et al argue that violent revolutions create a series of events which furthers autocracies in the future. In short, revolutions rarely deliver democratic and sustainable transitions.
We, as a country, need to be mindful of these facts so that we can effectively repel those who irresponsibly call for a revolution. The capability to murder and cause harm to public and private properties should never be accepted as a legitimate democratic bargaining chip, no, but instead those associated with unlawful acts must be hauled before our courts.
We hold no briefs for communists, but we cannot ignore the recently concluded SACP conference, the level of articulacy in terms of policy clarity, strategic thought and principles demonstrated by the various speakers at this conference is really of a high standard.
The culture of mediocrity that has infected conservatives when it comes to public speaking is a cause for serious concern, when atheists demonstrate such high levels in persuasive speech.
We certainly cannot afford, in the face of such serious efficacy, continue to have conservative politicians who make speeches that sound like they are addressing Lilima (a loose gathering of community members who come to assist a neighbour with weeding his fields for free, with the host only providing refreshments in the form of traditional brew (umcombotsi).
We speak to audiences that are exposed to really high standards, and we simply need to jack up our game, the moment calls for nothing less. The strategic choice for gradualism especially favours our country given a number of factors such as cultural homogeneity, small population, and our largely Christian culture.
Populists and ideological demagogues continue to pose serious threat to our fledgling democracy, and sponsoring these entities and individuals is equivalent to sponsoring political instability.
Demagogues and populists prefer a revolution because it absolves them of the daunting task of investing time in really ground-level activism; the beeline (revolution) to undemocratic power seems to be their only motivation.
share story
Post Your Comments Below
Nsingizini Hotspurs............. (2) 2
Mbabane Highlanders.......... (0) 1
Soccer &ndas...
A forensic audit into the Royal Science and Technology Park (RSTP) is set to begin shortly, follo...
The country has been jarred by two major events in recent history; the national stay away of 1997...
The Eswatini Water and Agricultural Development Enterprise (EWADE) has reported a significant inc...
All material © Swazi Observer. Material may not be published or reproduced in any form without prior written permission.
Design by Real Image Internet
